>>18697675
Prove yourself right with sources

True btw

>>18697675
>It's real
Wtf

>>18697678
>Different accounts from the three main sources used to "prove" he is a real person that all contradict each other which tells us he was a mere vessel they used
>80% of what is attributed to him in Plato's works is not even in character for him and it's just Plato using him as a mouthpiece using anachronistic terms

>Socrates we have sentenced you to death
>As is custom, you have the right to propose a reasonable alternative punishment for yourself
>Let's see... I think you should put me up in a 5 star hotel for what a great job I've done
>Okay fuck you, you're dead

>>18697675
Nobody in antiquity thought Socrates was fictional. If he was fictional you would think Aristotle would think so, especially because he was Plato's most formidable opponent.

>>18698291
>Nobody in antiquity thought Socrates was fictional
Greeks in the past considered Moses to be historical bad point

>>18698296
>Greeks in the past considered Moses to be historical bad point
That's not quite correct. His name in Hebrew is Moshe, and Greeks merely recognized that Jews believed in & talked about Moshe a great deal.

The Hellenized Greek translation of Moshe from Hebrew is "Moses".

>>18697675
Who cares?

>>18698561
A lot of people

>>18698305
No, Strabo and others all write about Moses as a real person.

>>18698905
>No, Strabo and others all write about Moses as a real person.
No they didn't. Strabo wrote about virtuous characteristics which he attributed to Moses, in the context of mythological stories which feature him as the main character. That is to say he complimented the virtues which Moses represented to the Jewish people, based on what they wrote and said about him, and Strabo used Moses as an example for which to compare & criticize more modern Jews of the era.

Strabo never claimed the Exodus happened in a real historical context, or that Moses was verifiably a real person either. Only Jews and Christians really believe that.

He gave conjecture about a fictional Jewish superhero and just wasn't rude about it.

>>18697675
Why does it matter?

>>18698928
>>18698305
All I see cope lol.
They treated Moses as a real person who lived.
>and just wasn't rude about it.
Just sums up the contention, why would they care about the feelings of the jews??? Some Greeks wrote harsh polemics against Moses mocking him, calling him a fraud who made up his mission and just convinced a band of jews to follow him, but none of them said he was a fake man. Why wouldn't they just say that plainly if that was the case for them all along according to you.

>>18697675
I can buy the others, but why would Aristophanes parody a figure who didn't exist?

>>18699050
>Why would anyone mock a made up character who is beloved?
No different than someone attacking a fictional book/tv/movie character to shit on their fans

Moses was a real person.

>>18698305
Moses is an Egyptian name though, it's not Hebrew in origin.

>>18699070
Great point actually

>>18699070
His hebrew name is Moshe.
"Mose(s)" is Egyptian sounding gibberish, made up by people who weren't Egyptian.
It's likely based on the names of pharaohs like Thutmose and Ramesses/Ramose. So Egpytian names non-egyptians would know. The -mose part means "Son of..." preceded by the name of an Egyptian god. So just "Mose" on its own makes no sense.

>>18698296
Greeks who considered Socrates to be real were chronologically close enough to have known people who knew Socrates. Unlike ancient Authors who obviously could have not done the same for Moses.
>>18698928
I do not think the greeks were nearly sceptical enough to make such a difference, at least systematically. I think you are here attributing to them a much more critical outlook than what they actually had.
>>18699039
What Greeks did that?
Neither Apion nor Manetho were Greek. They were Hellenized Egyptians, and those are the two ancient authors I know shat on Moses. Both did treat him as a real person, though.

>>18699086
>Greeks who considered Socrates to be real were chronologically close enough to have known people who knew Socrates. Unlike ancient Authors who obviously could have not done the same for Moses.
Their inconsistent accounts and Plato having no issue using Socrates as a mouthpiece is a big indication he was just a fictional character that other people had a different view of
>>18699084
>It's likely based on the names of pharaohs like Thutmose and Ramesses/Ramose. So Egpytian names non-egyptians would know. The -mose part means "Son of..." preceded by the name of an Egyptian god. So just "Mose" on its own makes no sense.
Because he didn't worship their God is the argument I have seen

>>18699090
>Because he didn't worship their God is the argument I have seen
Doesn't really make sense because he would be raised as an Egyptian and he was supposedly named by the Pharao's daughter.

The biblical explanation is interesting here. Because according to Exodus 2:10 the Pharao's daughter named him so because she drew (mǝšīṯīhū) him out of the water. But that word play only makes sense in hebrew and the hebrew word sounds like "Moshe" not like "Mose(s)". So the Hebrew name came first. The Egyptian sounding name was made up later.

>>18699097
Quick addition: An Egyptian princess would obviously not speak Hebrew in reality. So the whole section of the story is more folk tale than historical account.

>>18699104
Wouldn't she if she was Hyksos

>>18699084
>>18699070
>>18699090
>>18699097
Genesis is also filled with puns like this where the Hebrew names sound like Hebrew words for other things. It simply likely means that the explanation given for Moses' name was applied afterwards for poetic effect, whereas his original name really was [name of deity]mose.

My personal headcanon about it is that he when he was raised in the Egyptian palace he was raised as a priest to one of the Egyptian gods and he was just named after one of them originally
it's only after he flees to Midian and encounters YHWH in the burning bush that he finds out about his ancestors and who their God is i.e. he just dropped the first part of his name later as way of leaving behind his identity in Egypt, leaving only Mose. I like this headcanon theory because not only does it work as a historical explanation for the name but it's also like how YHWH changes the name of other people who encounter him such as Abram to Abraham or JAcob to Israel etc. and it'd be like Moses 'putting away the old man' after being baptized in the crossing of the red sea.

(in this same vein, Jesus renaming disciples like Simon into Peter/Cephas is a subtle connection/identification between him and YHWH btw and is about him having the authority)

>>18697675
>3 different people at the same time made up the same person for no reason
absurd

>>18699212
>3 different people at the same time made up the same person for no reason
Nice strawman
Writing different perspectives of a fictional character =/= they came up with the person

>>18698287
>anachronistic terms
plato was socrates' student, they lived in the same place at the same time

>>18699268
>plato was socrates' student, they lived in the same place at the same time
Socrates didn't live in Plato's later years where he put in thoughts and ideas "Socrates" would know if he was a real person

>>18698288
I always got the impression he was asking to be a janitor at the prytaneum. If they hated him so much they could make him go clean the accommodations of distinguished guests, which would be sufficiently humiliating and achieve their ends of removing him from influence while also allowing him to continue his work.

>>18698287
Explain Xenophon

>>18700061
jewish fabrication

>>18697675
In what cases has your method of criticism ever proven itself correct? In what other situation has it been demonstrated that a person which possessed contemporary first hand accounts has been demonstrated to not exist due to contradictions in said accounts? On the contrary, first hand accounts almost always have contradictory information between them: eg eyewitness testimony in criminal cases. It would actually be much more suspicious if this was not the case.
Even if you say proving non-existence is nigh impossible, then this is hardly an excuse. All you'd be saying there is that your method of critique is unfalsifiable and can never actually demonstrate itself to be effective. All you can do then, is attempt to negate the positive evidence, but its obvious that no amount of rhetoric could possibly negate the existence of multiple uncontested first hand accounts.

>>18698296
If your parents said you had a great-great-great-great grandfather who did X, Y, and Z, you might take their word for it assuming they have better information than you. While you can call this poor epistemics, because you cannot prove that he did not exist you may assume his existence based on the credibility of your parents. But if your parents said you had a grandfather that went to Thanksgiving with you, your birthdays, etc but you had never seen him in your life you would not believe them and would likely call a doctor. This is because, obviously, there is a complete difference between someone who existed a really long time ago vs someone that you would have seen yourself. Socrates would have been contemporary to the people writing about him and were a famous philosopher, extremely well known in the agora within living memory, were to simply not exist there would be people who mentioned it. You would have at least one single piece of evidence or something mentioning that nobody ever actually heard of Socrates before Plato, and yet you do not.

>>18698287
Yes, whoever heard of different people describing the same person in different ways? Anyway, Donald Trump is a Nazi.

>>18697675
Never existed